UK Offence Report

8 Any person who– a intentionally obstructs any person acting under these Regulations; b without reasonable…

regulation 8 of The Salmonella in Laying Flocks (Survey Powers) (England) Regulations 2005 (revoked)

This offence was read from the text as made, and no revised version was available, so a later revocation could not be ruled out. Check the current text at legislation.gov.uk.

What the provision says

8 Any person who–

a intentionally obstructs any person acting under these Regulations;

b without reasonable cause, fails to respond to inquiries under regulation 4(2)(a);

c without reasonable cause, fails to act as required by an inspector or authorised person exercising powers under regulation 4(2)(a) or (c) or regulation 6(1)(d); or

d provides to any person acting in the execution of these Regulations any information or documentation which he knows to be false or misleading, shall be guilty of an offence.

Text as made, from legislation.gov.uk. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.

Who it binds, and what has to be proved

Binds
a person
Conduct
obstructing an official exercising a power
Fault element
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (intentionally).

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: intentionally.

What would breach regulation 8?

These are illustrations, not law. They are generated from the provision’s own words to show the shape of the offence. Whether any particular conduct is caught depends on the full text, on any amendment since, and on the facts.

  1. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Salmonella in Laying Flocks (Survey Powers) (England) Regulations 2005.
  2. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
  3. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (2005-03-19); the standard scale is keyed to the date the offence was committed, and for conduct today the same words mean an unlimited fine.

Sentencing

Offences of this kind are usually sentenced under the guidelines below. This is a mapping by subject, not a finding about this provision, and the links go to a search of the Sentencing Council’s own site.

Prosecution figures

No published per-offence figure was found for this provision, and it could not be matched to a Ministry of Justice offence code. Offences created by statutory instrument very largely do not have one. Absence of a figure is not evidence that the offence is unused.

Status and lifecycle

Current status
Status not determined
Made
22 February 2005
In force from
19 March 2005
Extent
Not stated

How this was established: read from the text as made; no revised version available, so later revocation could not be ruled out.

What the instrument is for

(This note is not part of the Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

(This note does not form part of the Regulations) These Regulations, which apply in relation to England only, revoke and replace SI 2004/2885 which implemented Commission Decision 2004/665/EC (O.J. No. L303, 30.09.2004, p.30) concerning a baseline study on the prevalence of Salmonella in laying flocks of Gallus gallus. They correct errors in the interpretation and offences provisions and make other minor drafting changes. Commission Decision 2004/665/EC requires Member States to carry out a survey for salmonella prevalence in laying flocks in accordance with certain technical specifications referred to in Article 5 of the Commission Decision. The text of the technical specifications can be found at http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/food/biosafety/salmonella/tech_spec_sanco-34-2004_rev-3_en.pdf These Regulations– a revoke and replace the Salmonella in Laying Flocks (Survey Powers)(England) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/2885) (regulation 1); b designate the Secretary of State for the purpose of selecting premises for sampling and give inspectors the powers required for selecting premises for sampling (regulation 4); c provide powers for inspectors to enter premises for the purposes of the Commission Decision and for the purpose of enforcement of these Regulations (regulation 5); d provide powers for local authority officers to enter premises for the purpose of enforcement of these Regulations where agreement is reached with the Secretary of State for the local authority to enforce (regulation 5); e provide powers for inspectors to examine and retain records, take equipment and vehicles on to the premises, be accompanied by other persons, and request information, documentation and assistance, for the purpose of carrying out sampling under these Regulations and for the purpose of enforcement of these Regulations (regulation 6); f provide powers for inspectors to take samples of faecal and environmental material (regulation 6); g provide powers for local authority officers for the purpose of enforcement of these Regulations where agreement is reached with the Secretary of State for the local authority to enforce (regulation 6); h set out requirements for notices in writing (regulation 7); i prescribe offences and penalties (regulation 8 and 9); and j provide for enforcement by the Secretary of State of these Regulations as well as for enforcement by the local authority where this is agreed with the Secretary of State (regulation 10). A regulatory impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as it has no impact on the costs of business.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

How this was identified as an offence

Everything above rests on the judgement that this provision creates a criminal offence, rather than mentioning one. That judgement is made by rule, from the words of the provision, and this is the rule that made it — with a confidence of 0.92.

Basis
the provision says a person is “guilty of an offence”
Confidence
0.92 of 1.00

A provision that states a penalty for an offence created elsewhere can read very like one that creates an offence, and the rules can mistake the one for the other. If the text quoted above sets a penalty for something made an offence by another provision, treat the classification on this page with that in mind, and read the instrument.

Check the source